Re: [Qemu-devel] Configuring pflash devices for OVMF firmware

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

On 31/01/19 09:33, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> I thought secure=on affected only writes (and so wouldn't matter with
> readonly=on), but I was wrong:
> 
>     static MemTxResult pflash_mem_read_with_attrs(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t *value,
>                                                   unsigned len, MemTxAttrs attrs)
>     {
>         pflash_t *pfl = opaque;
>         bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE));
> 
>         if ((pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_SECURE)) && !attrs.secure) {
>             *value = pflash_data_read(opaque, addr, len, be);
>         } else {
>             *value = pflash_read(opaque, addr, len, be);
>         }
>         return MEMTX_OK;
>     }
> 
> pflash_data_read() is what pflash_read() does when pfl->cmd is 0.

Reads from flash actually do not go through here; this function executes
if the flash chip is already in MMIO mode, which happens after you
*write* a command to the memory area.  With secure=on, you just cannot
do a command write unless you're in SMM, in other words the flash chip
can only ever go in MMIO mode if you're in SMM.

> Hmm, why is it okay to treat all pfl->cmd values the same when
> secure=on?

But doesn't matter.  You just don't want MMIO mode to be active outside
SMM: all that non-SMM code want to do with the flash is read and execute
it, as far as they're concerned it's just ROM and the command mode is
nonexistent.

Paolo